A Note on Perry's Reconsideration of Macroeconomic Evidence from New Zealand

Perry in this journal draws on two new sources to challenge claims by Dalziel (2002) and Peetz (2005) about relatively weak labour productivity growth in New Zealand after the introduction of its Employment Contracts Act (ECA) in 1991. While new data raise further research questions, they do not ove...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inAustralian economic review Vol. 41; no. 4; pp. 389 - 393
Main Authors Dalziel, Paul, Peetz, David
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Melbourne, Australia Blackwell Publishing Asia 01.12.2008
Blackwell Publishers
Subjects
Australia-overseas comparisons
Australia: Economic conditions
Contracts
Employment contracts
Employment law
Labour
Labour productivity
Legislation
Macroeconomics
New Zealand
New Zealand. Employment Contracts Act 1991
New Zealand: Economic conditions
Productivity
Studies
New Zealand
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:Perry in this journal draws on two new sources to challenge claims by Dalziel (2002) and Peetz (2005) about relatively weak labour productivity growth in New Zealand after the introduction of its Employment Contracts Act (ECA) in 1991. While new data raise further research questions, they do not overturn our original conclusions. Whether the ECA contributed to higher labour input growth compared with Australia, it failed to improve labour productivity growth.
Bibliography:istex:59A3CE0366D64EFA608D68DC2C76CDE8459550F9
ArticleID:AERE509
ark:/67375/WNG-4HG036FR-Q
Australian Economic Review, v.41, no.4, Dec 2008: (389)-393
We thank Len Perry for helpful feedback on an earlier draft and Antony Ede at Statistics New Zealand for assistance with obtaining data. We are grateful to Mark Wooden and two referees for useful suggestions.
ObjectType-Article-2
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-1
content type line 23
ISSN:0004-9018
1467-8462
DOI:10.1111/j.1467-8462.2008.00509.x